PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

Mr. HEILBRONER. By adding those three words you have put that skin in the same class at 35 per cent.

Mr. FORDNEY. And by the ruling of the Board of Appraisers that has been brought back into the 20 per cent class now?

Mr. HEILBRONER. Yes, sir.

Mr. FORDNEY. The only thing you are afraid of is that you may be put back into the 35 per cent class again?

Mr. HEILBRONER. Yes. They may tamper with the ruling again. It was an expensive process for the manufacturers and importers of the country to hold up the industry for practically eight months until we could get a ruling on it, because until we knew the cost of our raw material we were not in a position to quote prices.

Mr. FORDNEY. I agree with you that it ought to be done if it is possible to do it, so as not to permit these other goods to come in at that lower rate.

Mr. HEILBRONER. We believe it perfectly proper that an article of this kind, composed of more than one skin, should pay a higher rate of duty than an article of the kind which is still a skin, even though it has been repaired. We would like to have the phraseology of the intended law changed, so that there will be no question about it.

The CHAIRMAN. You contend that if we strike out from the paragraph these three words that this larger piece of 10 skins, sewed together, will pay 35 per cent?

Mr. HEILBRONER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. It will pay it even if we knock out those three words?

Mr. HEILBRONER. Yes, sir; without the addition of any language whatever.

Mr. FORDNEY. Under the added language in the Payne law which is not in the Dingley and which is not included in those three words. Mr. HILL. If those two skins, which are matched in color and fur, are basted together, it would come in at 20 per cent.

Mr. HEILBRONER. No, sir.

Mr. HILL. Why? It does not make a strip of anything; simply two skins matched up.

Mr. HEILBRONER. But they are further advanced than dressing and dying.

Mr. HILL. That is just exactly what I think.

Mr. HEILBRONER. Consequently it would come in at 35 per cent under the present law.

Mr. HILL. Just specify single skins.

Mr. HEILBRONER. It would be entirely satisfactory to the industry of the country if the committee will make it plain, either way, as they see fit. But we protest against the paying of an additional duty of 15 per cent when an article has simply been sewed up to preserve it from further damage, and is not further advanced than dressing and dyeing.

Mr. HILL. You would not object to having it in a single skin. Mr. HEILBRONER. Absolutely not. I would like to file this brief for your further information.

The CHAIRMAN. File it with the clerk.

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

The brief of Mr. Heilbroner, referred to, is as follows:

The COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND Means,

Washington, D. C.

NEW YORK CIry, January 28, 1913.

GENTLEMEN: The bearer, Mr. Alex. Heilbroner, has been duly appointed by the Associated Fur Manufacturers (Inc.), to represent the members of this association at the hearings upon the tariff now being held by your committee.

Respectfully,

[SEAL.]

ASSOCIATED FUR MANUFACTURERS (INC.),
MAX THORN, President.

FRED KAUFMAN, Secretary.

NEW YORK, January 29, 1913.

GENTLEMEN: The Associated Fur Manufacturers, an incorporated body of the State of New York, begs to present through its representative, Mr. Alexander Heilbroner, the following petition for your consideration:

Schedule N, paragraph 439, should be revised in the following manner. The three words, "but not repaired," which appear in the second line should be omitted for the following reasons:

Nearly every animal is killed by some instrument which makes one or more holes in the skin; the process of dressing and dyeing also causes some defects; these holes and defects are repaired; the cost of repairing is next to nothing and is included in the cost of dressing and dyeing. It is done to prevent further damage and to give the skin a merchantable appearance, but adds nothing to its value.

While it was evidently the original intention of the makers of the act of 1909 that furs dressed on the skin, but not advanced further than dyeing, should be dutiable at 20 per cent ad valorem, the three words "but not repaired" have given an ambiguous meaning to the intent of the makers, which required a decision of the Board of the United States General Appraisers to define its classification.

This decision of the Board of General Appraisers was obtained after a lengthy period of uncertainty in the trade and involved very large expenses to the manufacturers throughout the country, and when obtained was of the unanimous opinion that the three words so inserted were not intended to advance the duties on furs and skins that had not been advanced further than dressing or dyeing.

In order that your petitioners and the manufacturers throughout the country may not again be placed in a position requiring a decision of the board of appraisers to state the intent of the makers of the law, it is most respectfully requested that the three words be omitted, thereby leaving an incontestable construction to the paragraph as it exists.

Respectfully submitted.

TESTIMONY OF ALFRED

MERCHANTS' CREDIT ASSOCIATION, NEW YORK CITY.

The witness was duly sworn by the chairman.

Mr. EISENBACH. Gentlemen, as a member of the Fur Merchants' Credit Association of New York I have been selected to appear before you and to say on their behalf that we are perfectly satisfied with the present tariff schedule on furs. We, however, would respectfully ask to have the three words in the paragraph 439, second line, "but not repaired," stricken out.

Mr. PAYNE. What do you want stricken out?

Mr. EISENBACH. The three words "but not repaired."

Mr. PAYNE. Oh, yes; I remember about those. They brought in some coats and ripped out the armholes.

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

The CHAIRMAN. I have not before me the Dingley law, but were those words in the former law?

Mr. EISENBACH. No.

Mr. PAYNE. No; they were put in the present law of 1909.

Mr. EISENBACH. These words are ambiguous, and have caused the fur trade a great deal of expense; that is, the interpretation of the meaning of these three words.

After a long delay the General Board of Appraisers have rendered a decision nullifying the meaning as formerly interpreted. We would therefore like, in order to prevent a possible recurrence of the same situation, to have these words taken out.

The CHAIRMAN. What do you say would be the effect on the importation in this line of goods if those words were to be taken out? Mr. EISENBACH. These words "but not repaired" were interpreted first as coming under the same line of furs as plates, which were raised from a 20 per cent duty to a 35 per cent duty. We proved to the board of appraisers that a repaired skin, in the sense of the fur trade, is not a manufactured part of the skin, not sewed together out of several kinds of skin, but simply certain holes and tears which will occur in the process of dressing and dyeing, which have been sewed. up in order to hold the skin together; that they do not come under the same schedule as several skins put together, which were interpreted as partly manufactured, and which duty had been raised to 35 per cent, while it was formerly only 20 per cent.

We are perfectly willing to have it remain that way, but since we have that decision of the board of appraisers-it was then understood by everybody that these three words were really not of any consequence, so we would like to have them stricken out and the duty remain as it is.

The CHAIRMAN. Where do those skins go if we strike out the words "but not repaired"? In what portion of the bill, when the repaired whole skins are imported?

Mr. PAYNE. They come in as they did before.

Mr. EISENBACH. They come in under the 20 per cent schedule the the same as any skins that are coming over dressed and dyed from the other side.

The CHAIRMAN. Suppose we strike it out of the schedule?

Mr. EISENBACH. They would come under the same schedule as they are coming in now.

Mr. HAMMOND. They are paying 35 per cent, if you strike these words out?

Mr. EISENBACH. No; they are paying 20 per cent, because we have the decision of the board of appraisers reducing it to 20 per cent. It was raised on account of these words and we protested, and successfully, because it was proven they should not come under the schedule where they say "repaired for use as material," which was raised to 35 per cent. These temporary sewed skins, which is only a defect sewed up, can not possibly come under the same line as several skins sewed together which are entirely manufactured.

Mr. PAYNE. Were you before the committee in 1909?
Mr. EISENBACH. No.

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

Mr. PAYNE. An importer brought in one of these repaired skins as a sample and laid it before the committee. A gentleman who was familiar with the business held it up before the committee and ripped out what had been sewed into the armhole of each side and showed a perfectly developed garment. I think they had the sleeves that they ripped out of another piece enough to show the garment was fully made, sewed together in every respect, different skins, except these armholes were sewed up, and they called that "repair." Accordingly they got it through the customhouse in that shape as a repaired skin.

The purpose of this was and I am glad it has been effectual, even for four years-to keep out those made garments that came in under that pretense. That was a specimen which was shown us, brought in here by an importer, to show what a grievous wrong it would be to put an extra duty on it.

When the committee saw it, saw the shape of the skin, and saw the shape of the garment as it came out, they put in those words that threw them into the other class, along with made-up garments. The CHAIRMAN. But he says the board of appraisers did not take your construction of it, and left them at the other rate.

Mr. FORDNEY. Only on those that are repaired. But the kind that Mr. Payne is speaking of still come in under this provision, I should say.

And let me say further: A gentleman came here with a skirt made of fur, with 150 odd skins. All that was necessary to complete that skirt was to put the band on the skirt, sew it up on the side, put a band on the bottom, and you had the skirt completed.

Those came in as repaired garments under the old law, and this language was put in here which put a higher rate of duty on that class of goods.

The CHAIRMAN. The witness now says it did not accomplish that result.

Mr. FORDNEY. If I understand him, and I want to understand him, you have referred to skins that are torn in manufacture and preparation, and so on, where holes are made in them, and that hole is repaired, for instance. This law affects the rate on that class of skins, concerning which you have a decision from the board of appraisers, but not such goods as Mr. Payne has described as a dress and the goods I have described as a skirt?

Mr. EISENBACH. Such as Mr. Payne describes and what you are trying to describe, I say, would remain just as they are, at 35 per cent. But the skins that are repaired only so that they will not fall apart. and that are not partly manufactured, are the goods concerning which we have had this decision from the board of appraisers and obtained relief, and we believe it to be perfectly right. But we want to have the words which caused all the trouble "but not repaired" stricken out, for that purpose. The others are all covered at a 35 per cent duty.

Mr. FORDNEY. You have sought and obtained relief for the repaired skins?

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes.

PARAGRAPH 439-FURS.

Mr. FORDNEY. But the skins referred to by Mr. Payne and myself pay the higher rate of duty under this law, whereas under the old law they all came in under the old rate?

Mr. EISENBACH. Quite correct, but you have already said in your paragraph here that these skins, such as you mean, shall pay 35 per cent, and we are perfectly contented. But you also put in the paragraph that skins not further advanced than dressing and dyeing "but not repaired" should pay 35 per cent.

Mr. FORDNEY. I agree with you. But you say you have sought and obtained relief.

Mr. EISENBACH. Yes.

Therefore these words in the new law under

that schedule are absolutely of no use.

Mr. FORDNEY. If you take that language out of this law, then will there not be the same danger as there was under the old law?

Mr. EISENBACH. I do not think so, because you have the schedule prepared whereby these skins further advanced should pay 35 per cent duty.

Mr. FORDNEY. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Witness, I will say if language can be put in there to protect this higher class of goods, that more will not be put upon it than really repaired skins, it would be perfectly proper; but I do not see any injustice to this man's business now, because he only pays the rate on repaired skins, by an interpretation of this law made by the board of appraisers.

Mr. HAMMOND. You have a decision, you say, from the board of appraisers admitting these skins under the 20 per cent rate? Mr. EISENBACH. Quite right.

Mr. HAMMOND. What difference does it make to you whether this language stays in the law or not?

Mr. EISENBACH. It might be interpreted again. I do not know whether the decision of the board of appraisers will be final under a new administration. It might be interpreted again the way it was first interpreted, and it would then again cause a great deal of expense to have the same thing to do over again. If these words are left out we are perfectly willing to pay the 35 per cent duty on such skins as Mr. Payne and Mr. Fordney have spoken about. I do not see that any possible damage could be done by striking these words out.

Mr. HAMMOND. If the decision is made protecting you, there could not be any damage come from leaving them in.

Mr. EISENBACH. But of course we do not know whether the decision is permanent, and if it were to be changed we would simply have to go over this same thing again and go to a great deal of expense, only to accomplish the same thing, while if these words are taken out it would not be necessary. The rest of the paragraph is plain as to what comes in under the 35 per cent duty; it specially provides for skins that come in prepared for use as material to pay the 35 per cent duty, and that is perfectly satisfactory to us. And with these three words out these repaired skins that are not advanced further than dyeing would come in under the 20 per cent duty, as they are coming in now. Mr. HAMMOND. Is the language the same as it was in the Dingley

law?

Mr. EISENBACH. It is the same as in the Dingley law, but these words "but not repaired" were not in it,

78959°-VOL 5-13- 44